Best Bible Translation?

veryrarelystable · **#41** by **veryrarelystable** » Aug 24, 2010 8:24 pm

Lazar wrote:All things being equal the English Standard Version is a nice mix of accuracy and readability.

The ESV is an evangelical fundamentalist translation whose general editor was arch-evangelical fundamentalist J.I. Packer. It’s an attempt to replace the RSV and NRSV in biblical critical circles with something that mistranslates in order to support fundamentalist doctrines, of the same type as I pointed out in my previous post.

It purports to be more towards the formal correspondence end of the spectrum, but this review points out that it’s not as word-for-word as people think.

One slightly unusual thing for a fundamentalist translation is that there is an edition which contains the deutero-canonical books. This is presumably part of its bid to oust the RSV and NRSV.

lordshipmayhem · **#42** by **lordshipmayhem** » Aug 25, 2010 12:35 am

And I haven't seen a soul talk about what to me is the very, very best (bar none!) translation of the Bible:

Olde Charlie Farquharson's Testament: From Jennysez to Jobe and After Words (MacMillan of Canada, 1978)

Animavore · **#43** by **Animavore** » Aug 25, 2010 8:01 pm

It's quite interesting, the story of the birth of the Israeli people, its like one of those foundation myths, like the one about Romulus and Remus. It's quite funny, though, that not having your foreskin removed separates you from your people.
Again, no reason given why they should have their foreskin removed. Did no one think it was weird either, Abraham suddenly going around the homestead, lopping the foreskins off every male and male servant under his roof?

My creationist friend once told me that when you read the Bible it's like fire leaps off the page. I haven't got that feeling yet.
Pressing on...

Wiðercora · **#44** by **Wiðercora** » Aug 25, 2010 11:00 pm

Have you reached the part where the Israelites manage to massacare the entire male population of a city because they're incapacitated by being wracked with pain from having their foreskins cut off after they convert to Judaism?

Animavore · **#45** by **Animavore** » Aug 25, 2010 11:02 pm

Wiðercora wrote:Have you reached the part where the Israelites manage to massacare the entire male population of a city because they're incapacitated by being wracked with pain from having their foreskins cut off after they convert to Judaism?

Nah. I started watching Avatar: The Last Airbender (animated series)

Hnau von Thulcandra · **#46** by **Hnau von Thulcandra** » Aug 26, 2010 12:59 am

At the risk of associating myself with a certain noxious breed of "Fundementalists",

1611 Authorized Version all the way!!!

And the frightfully liberal yet solid NRSV for fleshing out the KJV's occasional archaically worded passages. RSV is nice too. I hate the NIV for some reason.

TimONeill · **#47** by **TimONeill** » Aug 26, 2010 1:31 am

Hnau von Thulcandra wrote:At the risk of associating myself with a certain noxious breed of "Fundementalists",

1611 Authorized Version all the way!!!

Why? Why would you go "all the way" with an outdated 400 year old translation in an archaic form of English based on a limited set of manuscripts and texts and made without the benefit of modern linguistic knowledge, historical understanding, textual analytical techniques and translation tools?

That makes no sense if you want to actually understand the ancient texts you are trying to read.

SafeAsMilk · **#48** by **SafeAsMilk** » Aug 26, 2010 1:36 am

Animavore wrote:
Wiðercora wrote:Have you reached the part where the Israelites manage to massacare the entire male population of a city because they're incapacitated by being wracked with pain from having their foreskins cut off after they convert to Judaism?

Nah. I started watching Avatar: The Last Airbender (animated series)

Fucking amazing, isn't it?

Er, I guess I'd better get back to the OT... :oops:

LIFE · **#49** by **LIFE** » Aug 26, 2010 1:42 am

Animavore wrote:
twistor59 wrote:
Animavore wrote:
I have a Gideon Bible I got from a hotel,

Thou shalt not fucking steal.

It came free with the room

Out of curiosity, how did you transport the room?

SafeAsMilk · **#50** by **SafeAsMilk** » Aug 26, 2010 2:05 am

natselrox wrote:The Lolcatz Bible?

I have a dozen costly Gitas lying around in the house. No one's even opened the wrap. I can give you those if I come to Ireland anytime soon.

Hey, if you're ever in NY, bring one for me! :mrgreen:

I've got a couple version of the Gita, I have no idea how accurate they are but I remember enjoying quite a bit of it...and especially how concise/to the point it is. You don't often find that in religious writing!

Hnau von Thulcandra · **#51** by **Hnau von Thulcandra** » Aug 26, 2010 12:32 pm

TimONeill wrote:
Why? Why would you go "all the way" with an outdated 400 year old translation in an archaic form of English based on a limited set of manuscripts and texts and made without the benefit of modern linguistic knowledge, historical understanding, textual analytical techniques and translation tools?

That makes no sense if you want to actually understand the ancient texts you are trying to read.

If you're doing close scholarly study, by all means check out other versions, or better yet learn the original languages. And if you're not comfortable with a slightly old-fashioned book still written in modern English then waste no time in snagging some new translation. But for my general reading, with a few exceptions like John 1:1-18 which I think sounds better in the NRSV, I want to "worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness".

TimONeill · **#52** by **TimONeill** » Aug 26, 2010 12:39 pm

Hnau von Thulcandra wrote:
TimONeill wrote:
Why? Why would you go "all the way" with an outdated 400 year old translation in an archaic form of English based on a limited set of manuscripts and texts and made without the benefit of modern linguistic knowledge, historical understanding, textual analytical techniques and translation tools?

That makes no sense if you want to actually understand the ancient texts you are trying to read.

If you're doing close scholarly study, by all means check out other versions, or better yet learn the original languages.

Thanks - I do and have.

And if you're not comfortable with a slightly old-fashioned book still written in modern English then waste no time in snagging some new translation.

You're talking to a guy who can read Old English and most dialects of Middle English, so the Early Modern English of the KJV is hardly going to bother me. For those less fluent in the earlier forms of English, it can be misleading, however.

But for my general reading, with a few exceptions like John 1:1-18 which I think sounds better in the NRSV, I want to "worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness".

This thread was, I believe, about accuracy, not aesthetics.

orpheus · **#53** by **orpheus** » Aug 26, 2010 4:57 pm

TimONeill wrote:
Hnau von Thulcandra wrote:
TimONeill wrote:
Why? Why would you go "all the way" with an outdated 400 year old translation in an archaic form of English based on a limited set of manuscripts and texts and made without the benefit of modern linguistic knowledge, historical understanding, textual analytical techniques and translation tools?

That makes no sense if you want to actually understand the ancient texts you are trying to read.

If you're doing close scholarly study, by all means check out other versions, or better yet learn the original languages.

Thanks - I do and have.

And if you're not comfortable with a slightly old-fashioned book still written in modern English then waste no time in snagging some new translation.

You're talking to a guy who can read Old English and most dialects of Middle English, so the Early Modern English of the KJV is hardly going to bother me. For those less fluent in the earlier forms of English, it can be misleading, however.

But for my general reading, with a few exceptions like John 1:1-18 which I think sounds better in the NRSV, I want to "worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness".

This thread was, I believe, about accuracy, not aesthetics.

Well, not necessarily. The OP didn't specify. Actually, the fact that it people are talking about both makes this thread more interesting and informative.

Animavore · **#54** by **Animavore** » Aug 26, 2010 5:02 pm

I just wanted a Bible I could read through from cover to cover. I wasn't complaining about the accuracy of the translation (how would I know?), I was complaining that my translation was rubbish in the way it was written. Like a 6 year-old wrote it.

It has brought interesting discussion though.

Callan · **#55** by **Callan** » Aug 26, 2010 5:15 pm

I thought it was about aesthetics, or I'd never have stuck my pointy little nose in here.

I thought Ani was simply after something more pleasingly-written than the copy he'd - ah- acquired from his hotel room.

As I've mentioned before, I can't give any 12-point sermons on the subject of textual accuracy. But I defy the most stringent Biblical scholar to tell me that the language of the KJV isn't elegant, insipring and beautiful.

IndigoReader · **#56** by **IndigoReader** » Aug 26, 2010 10:35 pm

Before reading the thread I was going to post a very sarcastic 'New World Translation.' It wouldn't be sarcastic now.

NineOneFour · **#57** by **NineOneFour** » Aug 27, 2010 12:24 pm

Animavore wrote:Which is the best translation?
I have a Gideon Bible I got from a hotel, not sure what translation it is, all I do know is that it is written to poorly for me to read. It's like a bloody 6 year-old wrote it.
Probably a long shot, but does anyone know of the best Koran, Toa Te Ching and Bhagavad Gita/Upanishads translations? I'm trying to get a bit of a collection going.

http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Animavore · **#58** by **Animavore** » Sep 03, 2010 12:31 pm

How did it end up happening that the Bible NT was originally written in Greek?

klazmon · **#59** by **klazmon** » Sep 03, 2010 12:49 pm

Animavore wrote:How did it end up happening that the Bible NT was originally written in Greek?

Probably a legacy of Alexander conquering the entire region. After that Greek became the "international" language of the time. Sort of like English today. I guess any educated scribe learned to read and write Koine.

NineOneFour · **#60** by **NineOneFour** » Sep 03, 2010 12:52 pm

Animavore wrote:How did it end up happening that the Bible NT was originally written in Greek?

Blame Alexander the Great.

No, really.

Alexander spoke Greek and the territory he conquered became Greek-speakers, which included modern Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, and Iran. When he died, his three main Greek generals split the empire, but each third remained Greek-speaking.

The Romans had only taken over Turkey and Palestine within a generation or so and had not had time to Latinize the area. Most educated people (literates) spoke and wrote Greek in that area of the world.

In fact, the Ptolemies and Cleopatra in Egypt were Greeks, as were the client kings in Turkey, etc. Paul was from Tarsus, in Turkey, which at the time was heavily Greek-speaking.

Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Re: Best Bible Translation?

Who is online